President Trump has repeated several times when referring to this peace deal: paraphrase: the biggest thing since 3,000 years or at least 500. So what happened about 3,000 years ago?
Answer:
United Kingdom of Israel: The traditional date for King David becoming king is 1006 BC, marking the start of a "golden age" for the kingdom under his rule and his successor, Solomon.
Things that make you go hmmmm.
What happened about 500 years ago? Several things, including Protestant Reformation and the discovery of America by Columbus. What just happened? Trump signed an EO bringing back Columbus Day as the holiday and ditching indigenous people day at the federal level.
Things that make you go hmmmm.
It's easy to prove that God dealt with mankind differently during different periods f history. I already gave the example of being put to death for working on Saturday when we were under the law.
Yet no Christian thinks someone should be put to death for that today, because we are under grace.
Romans 6:14
Anyone who believes Romans 6:14 does not believe the Mosaic covenant still holds.
Yet they are still dispensationalists to recognize the different periods of time where God dealt with mankind differently.
Hence, not all dispensationalists believe Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants hold, because they don't think the Mosaic covenant still holds.
The first problem with your example is that is implies God changes. He is eternal, and thus changeless.
The Law is given to a specific people for a specific purpose, to prepare the way for Christ. It is not how God treated all of Mankind, just a set way of life for a particular people. Hence a Covenant not some thing bound to time, as God himself is also not temporal. Not that it matters since the Torah was never implemented by the Israelites anyways. It also served to show how political power is not salvific, despite all the utopian systems since then.
Specific people, specific purpose, specific period of time.
Congratulations, you're a dispensationalist.
Again, the definition:
How is that any different than what you just said?
Exactly. Because if it was, it wouldn't be dispensationalism according to the definition, would it? "Distinct eras".
AI response:
" and holds that God has separate, ongoing programs for the nation of Israel and the church"
This part. Israel IS the Church. Heirs of Abraham according to the promise and not by blood. A priestly people according to the Order of Melchizedek, with Christ as eternal High Priest. Not the Order of Aaron.
You're conflating two completely different topics in my opinion.
One being dispensationalism as defined, the other as to whether modern day Jews are saved.
Dispensationalism is true (God has dealt with mankind differently during different periods and with different groups of people).
And modern day Jews are not saved unless they've accepted Christ as their savior.
I asked AI a question and it answered it pretty well: does dispensationalism consider Jews to be saved without Christ or a messiah?
I think you're trying to pain a picture that dispensationalists think that modern day Israel / Jews will make it to heaven without accepting a messiah -- I think that is a mischaracterization of what dispensationalism is.